1. What kinds of reasons are offered for fabricating data? Which, if any, of those reasons are good reasons--i.e., reasons that might justify fabricating data?

- Deadlines, being pressed for time, extreme pressure, trying to get a higher status in your job, or possibly even getting a role on the board of the school

- None of them are good reasons.

2. Who is likely to be harmed by fabricating data? Does actual harm have to occur in order for fabrication to be ethically wrong?

- Researchers, co-workers, the public, the corporation you work for, affiliants, everyone

- No, it’s wrong even if nobody uses the research because it’s still lying.

3. What responsibilities does a scientist have for checking on the trustworthiness of the work of other scientists?

- Other scientists might use the fabricated data, which may lead to unintentional fabrication.

4. What should a scientist do if he or she has reason to believe that another scientist has fabricated data?

- Investigate, then tell a higher authority, watch them closely

5. Why is honesty in scientific research important to the scientific community? Why is honesty in scientific research important for the public?

- It’s important, so everyone’s data doesn’t get corrupted

- They need it to be true for their health

Summary: Overly Enthusiastic Researchers

By: Abby Gaudin, Laura Catherine Smith, Alise Alexander, and Sophia Holland

            Fabricating data, or making up facts, is a serious fault for a scientist to commit. Finding a meaning for the word “Scientific Misconduct” is difficult because everyone has their own definition. It is most commonly defined as intentional falsification of scientific data (dictionary.com), which, in our words, means fabricating or plagiarizing material for scientific research. Fraudulent research can be harmful to everyone, because the public relies on sound research.

            John Darsee, who worked at many prestigious colleges and institutions, was discovered to have been falsifying times on one of his experiments. During the investigation, four of his other studies also looked suspicious. He was punished and discredited, and he could not work in the NIH for 10 years. Harvard, one of the prestigious establishments where he worked, also had to pay a large fine for his research materials, and Darsee’s misconduct was thought to have been going on since he was an undergraduate.

In 1983, Dr. Robert Sprague accused Dr. Stephen Bruening of fabricating documents about medication for mental patients. Although Breuning admitted to the fraud three months after he was accused, the case took six more years to complete. Sprague received a lot of criticism and his wife also died from diabetes in the middle of the case. Sprague realized that mentally retarded people deserved factual research. Dr. Alan Poling stated that Breuning’s false studies were used in over a fourth of the papers used in the studies. This caused the entire study to be doubted, and many felt guilty for using the false research without knowing that it was invalid. 

            Fabricating studies is harmful to scientists and regular people alike. Scientists are morally obligated never to release fraudulent information and data, because scientists often base their studies off of one another and may use that data, accidentally creating more false studies that the public can read and use.